Jharkhand High Court
Uma Devi @ Masomat Uma Devi vs The State Of Jharkhand on 10 June, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 2284 of 2021
------
Uma Devi @ Masomat Uma Devi
... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party
------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Arup kr. Dey, Addl. P.P.
------
Order No.02 Dated- 10.06.2021
Heard the parties through video conferencing.
Learned counsel for the petitioner personally undertakes to
remove the defects as pointed out by the stamp reporter within two
weeks after the lockdown period is over.
In view of the personal undertaking of the learned counsel for
the petitioner, the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter are
ignored for the present.
Apprehending her arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court
for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with
Satgawan P.S. Case No.20 of 2018 registered under sections 304B/
201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner committed the
dowry death of her daughter-in-law -Kajal Kumari. It is further
submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is
then submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, drawing
attention of this Court to para-13 of the Judgment, passed by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Koderma in S.T. Case No. 68 of
2018, the copy of which is kept at annexure-4 (page nos. 18-26) of the
brief that in para -13 of the said Judgment, it has categorically been
mentioned by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Koderma
that the witnesses have admitted that the marriage of the deceased
with the accused was solemnized more than seven years prior to the
occurrence and she died due to heart attack. It is then submitted that
vide the said Judgment, the son of the petitioner has already been
acquitted. It is then submitted that the petitioner is an old lady of 82
years. It is next submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate
with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the
petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for grant of
anticipatory bail.
Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as
discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the
above named petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Hence, in the event of her arrest or surrender within a period of six
weeks from the date of this order, she shall be released on bail on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Koderma, in connection with
Satgawan P.S. Case No.20 of 2018 with the condition that the
petitioner will cooperate with the investigation of the case and
appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him
and will furnish her mobile number and a copy of her Aadhar Card
in the court below with the undertaking that she will not change her
mobile number during the pendency of the case subject to the
conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Sonu/Gunjan-
